Switched.
12-08-2012, 12:18 PM
#52
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: IAH 737 CA
Posts: 690
1) Still fail to see the problem with pay banding unless you see that as a way for lual to get a step on the sli. Short bus gets paid 757 rate.
2) jury still out on LOA 25. DO agree that it needs to be all or none. Not good for some and bad for others.
3) Give you that one. We blew leverage there.
4) Rumor control needed. Have you actually seen correspondence from either MEC that directly identifies this as a lcal demand or simply further negotiations.
12-08-2012, 12:23 PM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: 787 Capt.
Posts: 644
I'm not knockin' you for your opinion here but it's time for the lual pilots to step up and own their **** here. This load of crap about how the injustices that exist at lual are jp's fault is really making you sound like a a whiny-ass crack ***** in rehab. Man-up and take some responsibility for whats going on in your own house. Fix your **** and quit trying to look for a scapegoat cause things ain't going your way or your guys continually suck ass.
Look. I voted no but should this lump pass, so be it. I'm not happy with it, but I not going to sit here and **** in my beer and blame the next 5-10 years of this contract on you and every other lual pilot.
Look. I voted no but should this lump pass, so be it. I'm not happy with it, but I not going to sit here and **** in my beer and blame the next 5-10 years of this contract on you and every other lual pilot.
Thanks for not "Knocking" us. I'm sure you are going to be a delight to fly with.
12-08-2012, 12:29 PM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 880
I was merely answering your question with a question. If you are saying Jay is to "blame" for something that is detrimental to the L-CAL side, I'm simply asking you what that is. I'm not familiar with anything specific. I listed 4 things that Jay Pierce has done to advance his pilot groups standing in the ISL (which I think will probably be worthless anyway) at the expense of the L-UAL pilots. That's calling a spade a spade. If you have a similar example put forth by "our Jay", then I'm all ears.
Your opinion on the merits of the TA are noted. I disagree, and think that in this day and age it's a good agreement. There are some very strong improvements for L-CAL pilots in the deal, in work rules, B/C fund, etc. etc. The pay isn't as big a jump as it is for L-UAL pilots, and I can see how you would be frustrated with the Scope clause (though I hear a L-CAL SME gave a impassioned speech in EWR defending his assertion that the Scope in the TA is better than what you have now. I wasn't there, so I can't confirm this). If the L-CAL pilots think the leverage is there to get a deal that is better, then a "No" vote would be appropriate for you. Just remember, it has to be $1.3 million a day richer just to break even. Any improvements would have to be on TOP of that. And, like it or not, there is value to the L-UAL pilots for the airplanes and growth to be accessible to everyone, not just one side at the expense of the other. Remember, however, that Jay Pierce and 7 of the 11 CAL MEC reps support this deal, so they must have heard something in "ground school" that made them agree with my assertion that this is a good agreement.
Lastly, I haven't heard one pilot on the L-UAL side saying that they think DOH is the way the SLI will/should go. If you are hearing that rumor, then I'm unaware of the source. If you hear it from an actual UAL pilot, ask them if they would still think it appropriate for the merger to go DOH if we had merged with USAirways instead.
I expect "our Jay" to put forth his best case for the L-UAL pilots when the SLI is being argued. At that point, I will have no problem with "your Jay" doing the same. Then the chips will fall where they may. The issue I have is that Jay Pierce has poisoned the waters several times during the JCBA process, which was supposed to be independent of the SLI argument. That is inappropriate and in poor form in my estimation, and results in complaints from the effected L-UAL pilot group.
Your opinion on the merits of the TA are noted. I disagree, and think that in this day and age it's a good agreement. There are some very strong improvements for L-CAL pilots in the deal, in work rules, B/C fund, etc. etc. The pay isn't as big a jump as it is for L-UAL pilots, and I can see how you would be frustrated with the Scope clause (though I hear a L-CAL SME gave a impassioned speech in EWR defending his assertion that the Scope in the TA is better than what you have now. I wasn't there, so I can't confirm this). If the L-CAL pilots think the leverage is there to get a deal that is better, then a "No" vote would be appropriate for you. Just remember, it has to be $1.3 million a day richer just to break even. Any improvements would have to be on TOP of that. And, like it or not, there is value to the L-UAL pilots for the airplanes and growth to be accessible to everyone, not just one side at the expense of the other. Remember, however, that Jay Pierce and 7 of the 11 CAL MEC reps support this deal, so they must have heard something in "ground school" that made them agree with my assertion that this is a good agreement.
Lastly, I haven't heard one pilot on the L-UAL side saying that they think DOH is the way the SLI will/should go. If you are hearing that rumor, then I'm unaware of the source. If you hear it from an actual UAL pilot, ask them if they would still think it appropriate for the merger to go DOH if we had merged with USAirways instead.
I expect "our Jay" to put forth his best case for the L-UAL pilots when the SLI is being argued. At that point, I will have no problem with "your Jay" doing the same. Then the chips will fall where they may. The issue I have is that Jay Pierce has poisoned the waters several times during the JCBA process, which was supposed to be independent of the SLI argument. That is inappropriate and in poor form in my estimation, and results in complaints from the effected L-UAL pilot group.
12-08-2012, 03:35 PM
#56
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
1) Still fail to see the problem with pay banding unless you see that as a way for lual to get a step on the sli. Short bus gets paid 757 rate.
2) jury still out on LOA 25. DO agree that it needs to be all or none. Not good for some and bad for others.
3) Give you that one. We blew leverage there.
4) Rumor control needed. Have you actually seen correspondence from either MEC that directly identifies this as a lcal demand or simply further negotiations.
2) jury still out on LOA 25. DO agree that it needs to be all or none. Not good for some and bad for others.
3) Give you that one. We blew leverage there.
4) Rumor control needed. Have you actually seen correspondence from either MEC that directly identifies this as a lcal demand or simply further negotiations.
2) Agreed
3) Agreed
4) Fair enough, as it is only hearsay on our side. It was just strange that this issue came up at the last minute, and the CAL MEC refused to start "ground school" until the arbitrators decision. If that wasn't the case, it would seem to me that issue would have been decided during the previous process like all the other issues. But you are correct that I haven't seen any document to that effect.
I hope that when this is all over we can all unite behind our elected leadership and get on with fighting Jeff. I take no pleasure in being "pitted" against my fellow pilots. This process is extremely difficult for all of us involved... which is why I feel it might be unrealistic to expect too much more from any further negotiations. But again, that is simply my assessment. It's not more valid than anyone else's who took the time to go through all the material we have been presented. Cheers
12-08-2012, 03:39 PM
#58
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Agree with most. I am not a hater of this contract but many are. I just feel that we are all worth more and this doesn't capture the two pilot groups. If we are to excel at being the best airline in the world, then we should be treated/compensated accordingly. I do look forward to working together. I spend a lot of time in Denver and was there last week. I like what I see with in regards to UAL guys. A lot of fun at the doubletree!
Feel exactly the same. My impression of the CAL guys/gals is that you are a good bunch of blokes/er....blokettes. One way or another, looking forward to us all being on the same page.
12-08-2012, 04:14 PM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Position: 787 CA
Posts: 425
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
